DIV. OF ADMIN., STATE, DOT v. Ruslan, Inc.

497 So. 2d 1348
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 3, 1986
Docket4-86-0658
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 497 So. 2d 1348 (DIV. OF ADMIN., STATE, DOT v. Ruslan, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
DIV. OF ADMIN., STATE, DOT v. Ruslan, Inc., 497 So. 2d 1348 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

497 So.2d 1348 (1986)

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Appellant,
v.
RUSLAN, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 4-86-0658.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

December 3, 1986.

*1349 Franz Eric Dorn, Tallahassee, for appellant.

John C. Lukacs of Lukacs & Lukacs, P.A., Miami, for appellees Rhona Sandman and Howard Sandman.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an award of attorney's fees to the appellee-property owner in an eminent domain proceeding. The Department of Transportation claims that the $50,000.00 fee was excessive and not in accord with the holding in Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985).

The award of attorneys' fees in condemnation proceedings is governed by the provisions of Section 73.091-.092, Florida Statutes (1985) rather than Rowe. Those statutes contain specific guidelines for determining an appropriate fee to a landowner and the record reflects that the trial court followed those standards here. Considering the evidence of the attorney's time involved for the appellee, the fee awarded amounted to $125-$143 per hour, an amount well within the reasonable range contemplated by the statute. We also reject the Department's claim that the appellee was not entitled to compensation for attorney's time spent on some claims which eventually were rejected by the court. See Hodges v. Department of Transportation, 323 So.2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975).

HERSEY, C.J., and ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

City of North Miami Beach v. Reed
863 So. 2d 351 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
DOT v. Robbins and Robbins, Inc.
700 So. 2d 782 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Seminole County v. Coral Gables Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
691 So. 2d 614 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
In Re Estate of Platt
586 So. 2d 328 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1991)
In Re Estate of Warwick
543 So. 2d 449 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
In re Estate of Proctor
23 Fla. Supp. 2d 40 (Florida Circuit Courts, 1987)
What an Idea, Inc. v. Sitko
505 So. 2d 497 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
497 So. 2d 1348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/div-of-admin-state-dot-v-ruslan-inc-fladistctapp-1986.